mirror of
https://github.com/paperclipai/paperclip.git
synced 2026-11-08 12:33:05 +01:00
DottaandClaude Opus 5.5
26391707fb
## Thinking Path
> - Paperclip is the open source app people use to manage AI agents for
work
> - Native OpenCode runs turn the provider's last assistant text into
the task's visible reply
> - A model can loop until it reaches the output limit. The provider
then reports `finish: "length"`
> - The driver used that cut-off text as the final answer, and the run
succeeded with a broken reply
> - This pull request treats a response that stopped at the output limit
as incomplete
> - The benefit is that users get the accepted completion summary or one
corrected answer, never a truncated wall of text
## Linked Issues or Issue Description
**What happened?**
In a QA staging run, an OpenCode agent on
`openrouter/deepseek/deepseek-v4.1-flash-1017` called `paperclip_finish`
correctly. Then it produced about 32,000 output tokens of repeated text
(`E2E_QUIP_QUIP_...`) until the output limit stopped it. The driver
selected this truncated text as the settled final answer. The run
succeeded, and the task reply was wrong.
**Expected behavior**
A response that the provider stopped at the output limit is not a
complete answer. If an accepted completion report exists, its summary is
the reply. If not, the driver asks for one concise final answer. If that
also stops at the limit, the turn fails.
**Steps to reproduce**
1. Run a native OpenCode turn where the model calls `paperclip_finish`.
2. Let the next assistant message run to the output limit (OpenCode
reports `finish: "length"`).
3. Before this change, that message text is emitted as the final
`agentMessage`.
**Paperclip version or commit**
master at e8163fc860.
## What Changed
- `opencode-server-driver.ts`: record assistant messages that finish
with `length`. Emit a `harness.diagnostic` with code
`opencode_output_limit_reached`.
- Exclude text from these messages from final-answer selection and from
the empty-response check. An accepted completion summary then resolves
the reply (existing behavior when no final text exists).
- Without an accepted result, reuse the existing single correction
prompt. Its first sentence says that the previous response reached the
output limit and was discarded.
- If the correction also fails, the turn fails with
`opencode_output_limit_reached`, not `opencode_empty_response`.
- `native-provider-failure.ts`: add `opencode_output_limit_reached` to
the known OpenCode runner failure codes.
- Tests: new `output-limit.test.ts` (limit then answer, limit twice,
normal), and a driver test for a runaway reply after an accepted
`paperclip_finish`, with a new fake-server scenario.
## Verification
- `npx vitest run src/drivers/opencode` in `packages/paperclip-runner`:
13 files, 166 tests passed.
- Negative controls: with the old driver, the two new limit cases and
the post-completion case fail.
- `native-provider-failure.test.ts`: 57 tests passed.
- The live QA staging journey is not verified yet. That needs a staging
deploy of this change.
## Risks
- A long but valid answer that ends exactly at the output limit is now
discarded and gets one correction request. The provider itself marks
such an answer as cut off, so it was already incomplete.
- When pre-tool commentary exists and the only post-tool text is
truncated, existing selection rules can pick that commentary. This is
the same as the existing behavior when no post-tool text exists.
- Only the OpenCode driver changes. Other drivers are not affected.
## Model Used
- Claude Opus 5.5 (`claude-opus-5-5`), Anthropic, via Claude Code with
tool use (shell, browser, code editing). Extended reasoning was used.
## Checklist
- [x] I have included a thinking path that traces from project context
to this change
- [x] I have specified the model used (with version and capability
details)
- [x] I have checked ROADMAP.md and confirmed this PR does not duplicate
planned core work
- [x] I have searched GitHub for duplicate or related PRs and linked
them above
- [x] I have either (a) linked existing issues with `Fixes: #` / `Closes
#` / `Refs #` OR (b) described the issue in-PR following the relevant
issue template
- [x] I have not referenced internal/instance-local Paperclip issues or
links (only public GitHub `#NNN` / `github.com/paperclipai/paperclip`
URLs)
- [x] My branch name describes the change (e.g. `docs/...`, `fix/...`)
and contains no internal Paperclip ticket id or instance-derived details
- [x] I have run tests locally and they pass
- [x] I have added or updated tests where applicable
- [x] I have updated relevant documentation to reflect my changes
- [x] I have considered and documented any risks above
- [ ] All Paperclip CI gates are green
- [ ] Greptile is 5/5 with no open P2s, recommendations, or follow-ups
- [x] I will address all Greptile and reviewer comments before
requesting merge
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>